IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v9y2020i10p390-d427676.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Valuation of Mediterranean Cultural Landscapes: Exploring Landscape Preferences and Ecosystem Services Perceptions through a Visual Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Íñigo Bidegain

    (Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, c. Darwin 2, Edificio de Biología, 28049 Madrid, Spain
    Faculty of Forest Sciences and Conservation of Nature, Universidad de Chile, Av. Santa Rosa 11315, La Pintana, Santiago 8820808, Chile
    Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad de las Américas, Av. 5 de abril 0620, Maipú, Santiago 9251454, Chile)

  • César A. López-Santiago

    (Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, c. Darwin 2, Edificio de Biología, 28049 Madrid, Spain
    Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, c. Darwin 2, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

  • José A. González

    (Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, c. Darwin 2, Edificio de Biología, 28049 Madrid, Spain
    Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, c. Darwin 2, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

  • Rodrigo Martínez-Sastre

    (Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, c. Darwin 2, Edificio de Biología, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

  • Federica Ravera

    (Departament de Geografía, Universitat de Girona, Edifici Sant Domènec II, Pl. Ferrater i Mora 1, Campus Barri Vell, 17004 Girona, Spain
    Càtedra en Agroecologia i Sistemes agroalimentaris, Universitat de Vic—Universitat Central de Catalunya, C/de la Laura, 13, Vic, 08500 Girona, Spain)

  • Claudia Cerda

    (Faculty of Forest Sciences and Conservation of Nature, Universidad de Chile, Av. Santa Rosa 11315, La Pintana, Santiago 8820808, Chile)

Abstract

Mediterranean cultural landscapes have been recognized as multifunctional landscapes that are currently threatened by two opposing trends: rural abandonment and agricultural intensification. Uncovering people’s perceptions of different landscape configurations, and how inhabitants value the contributions of nature to human wellbeing, is essential to understanding current landscape trends. In this study, we analyze the social perception of the cultural landscapes of Sierra Morena (Andalusia, Spain) based on 389 face-to-face visual questionnaires in an attempt to understand individuals’ landscape preferences, the reasons behind those preferences and how those landscapes are perceived as suppliers of ecosystem services by different groups of stakeholders. Four groups of stakeholders were identified that differed in how they perceive and value the cultural landscape. An urban-related group was characterized by their preferences for pine plantations and “green” landscapes, guided mostly by aesthetic criteria. A livestock-related group showed a clear preference for wood–pasture landscapes (dehesas) due to their ability to supply multiple ecosystem services. An environmentally aware group showed preferences for dehesas and Mediterranean forests, mainly guided by ecological criteria. Finally, an olive-related group showed a clear preference for olive grove landscapes as key for the regional economy and their cultural identity. Overall, the local inhabitants of Sierra Morena perceived a higher supply of ecosystem services in moderately disturbed landscapes, such as dehesas and mosaic landscapes, than in highly disturbed ones, such as conventional olive groves and pine plantations, or in less used landscapes, such as the Mediterranean forest. Understanding the differences in valuation/demand for ecosystem services among groups of stakeholders, characterized by their landscape preferences, provides important information with which to identify potential trade-offs and conflicts, thereby providing insights into the improvement of landscape planning and decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Íñigo Bidegain & César A. López-Santiago & José A. González & Rodrigo Martínez-Sastre & Federica Ravera & Claudia Cerda, 2020. "Social Valuation of Mediterranean Cultural Landscapes: Exploring Landscape Preferences and Ecosystem Services Perceptions through a Visual Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-22, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:10:p:390-:d:427676
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/10/390/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/10/390/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tom Moore & Gemma Tully, 2018. "Connecting landscapes: examining and enhancing the relationship between stakeholder values and cultural landscape management in England," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 769-783, August.
    2. Gordon, Line J. & Finlayson, C. Max & Falkenmark, Malin, 2010. "Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(4), pages 512-519, April.
    3. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Transcendental values and the valuation and management of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 241-257.
    4. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    5. Christopher M. Raymond & Matteo Giusti & Stephan Barthel, 2018. "An embodied perspective on the co-production of cultural ecosystem services: toward embodied ecosystems," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(5-6), pages 778-799, May.
    6. Orenstein, Daniel E. & Groner, Elli, 2014. "In the eye of the stakeholder: Changes in perceptions of ecosystem services across an international border," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 185-196.
    7. Rewitzer, Susanne & Huber, Robert & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne & Barkmann, Jan, 2017. "Economic valuation of cultural ecosystem service changes to a landscape in the Swiss Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 197-208.
    8. Zoderer, Brenda Maria & Tasser, Erich & Carver, Steve & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2019. "Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem service supply and ecosystem service demand bundles," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Arnold Wollenberg, 1977. "Redundancy analysis an alternative for canonical correlation analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 42(2), pages 207-219, June.
    10. García-Nieto, Ana P. & Quintas-Soriano, Cristina & García-Llorente, Marina & Palomo, Ignacio & Montes, Carlos & Martín-López, Berta, 2015. "Collaborative mapping of ecosystem services: The role of stakeholders׳ profiles," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 141-152.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dora Isabel Rodrigues Ferreira & José-Manuel Sánchez-Martín, 2022. "Agricultural Landscapes as a Basis for Promoting Agritourism in Cross-Border Iberian Regions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-35, May.
    2. Juan F. Velasco-Muñoz & José A. Aznar-Sánchez & Marina Schoenemann & Belén López-Felices, 2022. "An Analysis of the Worldwide Research on the Socio-Cultural Valuation of Forest Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.
    3. Óscar González-Yebra & José Ángel Aznar-Sánchez & Juan Francisco Velasco-Muñoz & Belén López-Felices, 2023. "A methodological proposal for the sociocultural valuation of ecosystem services," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(2), pages 68-77.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Krause, T. & Marbà , N., 2018. "The use of sociocultural valuation in sustainable environmental management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 158-167.
    2. Tindale, Sophie & Vicario-Modroño, Victoria & Gallardo-Cobos, Rosa & Hunter, Erik & Miškolci, Simona & Price, Paul Newell & Sánchez-Zamora, Pedro & Sonnevelt, Martijn & Ojo, Mercy & McInnes, Kirsty & , 2023. "Citizen perceptions and values associated with ecosystem services from European grassland landscapes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    3. Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2022. "Benefits of Stakeholder integration in an ecosystem services assessment of Mount Carmel Biosphere Reserve, Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    4. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chr, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    5. Li-Pei Peng & Wei-Ming Wang, 2020. "Hybrid Decision-Making Evaluation for Future Scenarios of Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Shuping Zhang & Xuehui Sun & Kun Zhang & Xiaozheng Zhang & Renqing Wang & Jian Liu & Shuping Zhang, 2021. "An Attempt To Identify Cultural Ecosystem Services And Related Land Use Types In Rural Areas Under Urbanization," Environment & Ecosystem Science (EES), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 121-128, September.
    7. Yaofeng Yang & Yajuan Chen & Zhenrong Yu & Pengyao Li & Xuedong Li, 2020. "How Does Improve Farmers’ Attitudes toward Ecosystem Services to Support Sustainable Development of Agriculture? Based on Environmental Kuznets Curve Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    9. Bryce, Rosalind & Irvine, Katherine N. & Church, Andrew & Fish, Robert & Ranger, Sue & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 258-269.
    10. Balaine, Lorraine & Gallai, Nicola & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2020. "Trading off environmental goods for compensations: Insights from traditional and deliberative valuation methods in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    11. Burdon, D. & Potts, T. & McKinley, E. & Lew, S. & Shilland, R. & Gormley, K. & Thomson, S. & Forster, R., 2019. "Expanding the role of participatory mapping to assess ecosystem service provision in local coastal environments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    12. Verburg, René & Selnes, Trond & Verweij, Pita, 2016. "Governing ecosystem services: National and local lessons from policy appraisal and implementation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 186-197.
    13. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    14. Wubante Fetene Admasu & Annelies Boerema & Jan Nyssen & Amare Sewnet Minale & Enyew Adgo Tsegaye & Steven Van Passel, 2020. "Uncovering Ecosystem Services of Expropriated Land: The Case of Urban Expansion in Bahir Dar, Northwest Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-20, October.
    15. Mascarenhas, André & Ramos, Tomás B. & Haase, Dagmar & Santos, Rui, 2016. "Participatory selection of ecosystem services for spatial planning: Insights from the Lisbon Metropolitan Area, Portugal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 87-99.
    16. Qinqin Shi & Hai Chen & Di Liu & Tianwei Geng & Hang Zhang, 2022. "Identifying the Spatial Imbalance in the Supply and Demand of Cultural Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-20, May.
    17. Adam P. Hejnowicz & Murray A. Rudd, 2017. "The Value Landscape in Ecosystem Services: Value, Value Wherefore Art Thou Value?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-34, May.
    18. Silvia Novelli & Francesca Moino & Patrizia Borsotto, 2022. "External Benefits of Irrigation in Mountain Areas: Stakeholder Perceptions and Water Policy Implications," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, August.
    19. Maia de Souza, Danielle & Lopes, Gabriela Russo & Hansson, Julia & Hansen, Karin, 2018. "Ecosystem services in life cycle assessment: A synthesis of knowledge and recommendations for biofuels," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 200-210.
    20. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri, 2021. "Valuation through deliberation - Citizens' panels on peatland ecosystem services in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:10:p:390-:d:427676. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.